Matthias Scheler wrote:
>
> In article <20011008225337.B24420@c35.jgrind.org>,
> Johnny Lam <jlam@jgrind.org> writes:
> > I've been working on an update of www/php4 to the latest released version
> > 4.0.6. I intend to make the following changes:
> >
> > * www/php4 will contain only the base package with _every_ extension
> > _not_ compiled in.
>
> This will confuse people or lead to "PHP4 sucks on NetBSD" complaints.
> What about creating a "php4-base" package and turning "php4" into
> a Meta package?
I don't agree that this would confuse people. PHP4 would continue to
suck as much as it does now, but it would certainly make life easier
for people like me. I use horde/imp and need mysql and imap support
built in. Right now, I have to go in and uncomment/comment various
options (many of which don't work) to get a working PHP4 that meets
my needs. If I need to add a different option, I end up mucking
about in the Makefile for the package (which could then get
overwritten again) trying to get all of the options I need set
correctly.
It would be fantastic for people that have tried it the way we're
doing it now, since the model right now is just broken. The module
model (try typing that three times fast) that we use for Perl works
just fine: I've never heard anyone complain about it. Extending the
model to PHP4 is logical and makes our package tree more self-similar.
It would also make it easier on the dependency system, since now
we would be able to specify *exactly* the components we need, and
not have to rebuild all of PHP if we need to add new functionality.
Horde and Imp are good example: I would much rather have imp depend
on php4-IMAP and php4-MySQL, and let the rest of the dependencies
cascade from there. Right now, they depend on php4, which may or
may not have the right options turned on.